Do you mean to say that Petino's situation only became a "story" when he pressed charges of extortion?
Surely, you jest.
And even if this were true (it's not) - how then do you explain Tiger Woods' sex life being drug into the national spotlight?
In fact, on average, I bet she spends as much time - or more - with her players than most officers spend with theirs.
If Tiger's personal life had nothing to do with his status as a professional golfer (I agree, it didn't)...why then was it a national scandal for several months?
Why was his sex life placed under a microscope, and hers is somehow off-limits?
Tiger was assaulted by his wife. That made national news. The rest cascaded from that. He is also one of the ten most recognizable athletes in the nation. Thus, much like Jennifer Aniston getting in a magazine for purchasing ice cream, everything Woods does gets at least a little attention.
Warlick, however, has no duty to do anything other than coach her team to the best of her ability. She doesn't have any obligation to attach herself to any particular issue.
This also parallels my point with Obama. He was black, thus it could be used as a symbol that affirmative action succeeded in his case. However it is a success because we knew people always perceived him as black and he could have suffered biases if not for affirmative action (presumably).
My point is that if we don't know if Warlick is gay and she gets the job, then it is only a triumph if heretofore all gay women really sucked at coaching basketball. This would be tantamount to saying black people are innately not good enough to be president (using the Obama comparison, if you will), yet Obama broke through that and was the first black person good enough to be president and thus an achievement to be honored....just as Warlick, who despite her being gay, became a good enough coach to get the job. That is the only reason why I can think that the gay community would hold up Warlick getting the job as an achievement. Obviously, thats hogwash....which is why I content there is no reason to know because it isn't an achievement of gay rights and is nothing to be celebrated. If people didn't know she was gay and she got the job while being gay that isn't an achievement for the gay community...unless she was the first gay woman capable of coaching..again, hogwash.
So, my point is that is a bit silly to suggest that not asking her the question is denying the gay community a right to celebrate some (manufactured) achievement.
Fact is, it would probably be hard for a gay woman to recruit young women into her program. I would say that she would prefer to be able to keep that private if it is the case.
One of the greatest linebackers in UT history was gay.
Metro Pulse had a good article on him a few years ago.
Eliminating the walleye scourge.....one fish at a time.
Anyone know why Holly wears a ring on her left ring finger? Just wondering? Not sure if it's a wedding band, fashion ring, or just a decoy. Anyway hope she's not taken...this lesbian would love to be the next Mrs. Warlick! But seriously...she is a great coach. I wish her the best of luck. Much love! Go Vols! Go Boilers!
I wish Holly the best of luck, of course - but she faces some tall challenges....not the least of which is the entire situation with Pat.
I also wish you the best of luck in landing her, Boiler23, if she is indeed a lesbian and not taken.
Everyone welcome orangetaz....
Yes, Warlick is definitely walking into a rough situation. By that I mean she is unproven and is replacing the most well-proven coach ever in her sport.
In women's BB I think it's a bigger story if you are involved in the sport and you aren't a lesbian or don't receive an AARP card.